Before the relational model became dominant (circa 1970s), was organizational data commonly stored in separate files—often on magnetic tape reels—managed by file-processing systems rather than a DBMS?

Introduction / Context:
Prior to widespread relational DBMS adoption, organizations used file-processing systems. Applications read and wrote separate files—on tape or disk—without a unified DBMS providing schema, concurrency, or query optimization. Tapes were prevalent for batch jobs and archival storage.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Era: pre-1970/early 1970s.
• Media: magnetic tapes and early disks.
• Management: application-driven file I/O, not SQL-based DBMS.

Concept / Approach:
File systems lacked centralized metadata, declarative queries, and standardized concurrency control. Each program imposed its own record layout. Data redundancy, inconsistency, and rigid coupling of code and data were common problems that the DBMS paradigm set out to solve.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Recognize the historical storage mediums (tape, sequential files). Contrast with relational DBMS capabilities that emerged later. Conclude the statement reflects the prevailing practice before relational systems.

Verification / Alternative check:
Historical accounts of mainframe batch processing show tape-mounted jobs and COBOL/Assembler programs handling records directly, confirming the context.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Geography or personal-computer qualifiers are irrelevant; the shift was industry-wide.

Common Pitfalls:
Interpreting “all data” literally; while not literally every dataset was on tape, it was a common, representative medium in that era.

Final Answer:
Correct